I would like to bring your attention to a commentary on Revelation that makes the most spiritual sense to me. I have read many of the various interpretations and this one by Jim Fowler witnesses to me and coheres with the Word of God far more than anything I have read. Very interesting and perceptive in my opinion. Hope you learn something and are edified. Would love to discuss with anyone.

outsidethecamp wrote:Sure, I'll be glad to, but it covers many different subjects as you can imagine.

Hey there, Strangelove, sorry I have not provided an outline of the main points. It's not something I have written down and ready to post. Super busy during my day job, so it might take a bit longer till you get it.

James Fowler gives a very insightful intro (I think). http://www.christinyou.net/pages/revintro.html

He gives a quick synopsis of major beliefs before explaining the "Christocentric" approach to Revelation, so I will leave you with this for now:

Varying Interpretations

It will be instructive to consider some of the varying interpretations of Revelation and the interpretive methods they employ. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of varying interpretations of the Revelation, but some of the broader schools of interpretation might be identified as follows:

(1) Preterist interpretation. This label is derived from the Latin word praeter, meaning "past." This interpretation views the pictures of Revelation as referring to what was happening in the past, in the first century. They see the images as representing governmental persecution during the reign of either Nero or Domitian. Most understand Revelation chapters 21 and 22 as referring to the future, but there are some who "spiritualize" and put all 22 chapters of Revelation back in the past of the first century.

(2) Historicist interpretation. This interpretation stretches out the images of Revelation to refer to the history of the Western church. For example, the "fifth trumpet" has been interpreted as the Mohammedans in the 7th century; the "sixth trumpet" has been viewed as the invasion of the Turks. Chapter 10 allegedly refers to the "strong angel" who announces the Reformation when the "little book" was found, i.e. the Bible. The "seven thunders" are against the Pope. Revelation 11 and the measuring of the temple is interpreted as the Reformation determination of the true church, and the two witnesses have been interpreted as Luther and Calvin against Rome. The ultimate victory is the overthrow of the Roman papacy.

(3) Futurist interpretation. Revelation 1-3 is recognized to be in the past, but 4-22 are regarded as the record of future events in the seven-year tribulation, leading to the second coming and the millennium. Ryrie, for example, takes 1:19 as the structural "key" for Revelation: (1) "things seen" - 1:9-20 (2) "things which are" - 2:1-3:22 (3) "things which shall take place" (4:1-19:21 in the tribulation; 20:1-15 in the millennium, etc.)

(4) Triumphalist interpretation. Sometimes called the idealist or symbolic interpretation. This interpretation usually sees the images of Revelation as explaining the conflict of good and evil, God and Satan, throughout all of time.

The preterist commentator interprets the message of Revelation primarily as in the past. The historicist interprets the message of Revelation primarily as the process of Western history. The futurist interprets the message of Revelation as referring primarily to the future. The triumphalist interprets the message of Revelation primarily as the symbolic representation of the triumph of Jesus Christ in every age.

These varying interpretations are not issues to fight over. There is value in each of them. From the preterist we can learn that Christianity is contextually rooted in the past, and so is the Revelation. From the historicist we can learn that Christianity is continually timely, and so is the Revelation. From the Futurist we can learn that Christianity is confidently hopeful for the future, and so is the Revelation. From the Triumphalist we can learn that Christianity is constantly recognizing Christ's victory, and the book of Revelation certainly reveals such.

Regardless of which interpretive method one employs, one has to admit that there is symbolism in Revelation that pictures the triumph of Christ; the letter was first written to historical churches in Asia in the past, back in the first century; it is a revelation that has had some message for Christians throughout history; and Revelation does speak of the ultimate victory of Christ at the end of time in the future.

In this study we will employ a Christocentic or Christological interpretation that would probably be a sub-category of the Triumphalist or Symbolic interpretation. The reason I employ the Christocentric-Triumphalist interpretation of Revelation is because it seems to me to provide the best consistency with the interpretation of the rest of the Scriptures. The Bible is consistent in its message from beginning to end, and the Bible is the best commentary on the Bible. The consistency of this interpretation is seen from its:

(1) Scriptural consistency. The whole of the revelation of Scripture is to reveal that Jesus Christ is the divine life that makes man man as God intends. Religion will not suffice. The "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" can be viewed as the "religion" tree; the "tree of life" as Christianity. The natural tendency of man is to revert to "religion" ­ man-made religion." (Col. 2:21).

There is a consistency in this interpretation with the Old Testament prophets. They were critiquing "religion" and calling for repentance, using some of the same images.

There is a consistency in the use of picture-language and story-telling. God uses pictures. The entire Old Testament can be viewed as the "picture-book" illustrating what God was to do in Jesus Christ.(2) New Testament consistency. The entirety of the new covenant literature, the New Testament, explains the superiority of Christianity over all "religion." Christianity is not religion, it is the vital dynamic of the life of Jesus Christ lived by grace. The New Testament concept of "prophecy" is primarily that of proclamation rather than prediction; forth-telling rather than foretelling. The prophecy of Revelation is likewise a proclamation of Jesus Christ, rather than the future.

(3) Internal consistency. The preterist and futurist interpretations seem to segment the interpretation of Revelation, some in the past, some in the future, with a big chasm in-between in the present. This tends to divide the Revelation into "revelations," as many people inaccurately refer to this book, and create a disjuncture. The Christocentric-Triumphalist interpretation that explains the conflict between Christianity and religion, allows the entire book to remain consistently connected. Chapters 2 and 3 provide the historical setting of "religion" creeping into the churches, so that chapters 4-22 can be pictorially placed alongside to reveal the conflict between Christianity and religion.

My note: It is not Christian Zionist based, either. Much the opposite.